What's up with Ingles?
- Thread starter Jingled
- Start date
jom2003
Well-Known Member
Jingles at his prime. Absolutely.
Jingles at probably the last year of his professional career? not so much
rjfan
Well-Known Member
A lot of his age and Olympics should apply, but he's dependant off the screens from the big to operate, which kinda hurts his game alongside Whiteside as that's the part of Hassan's game that's a real dropoff from Favors.
Also Paschall, who as Whiteside has been a real good adition on its own, but his lack of spacing make teams able to send other man on the ballhandler. Mitchell and Conley are able to exploit that, and a lot of Eric's offensive contribution comes from not having anyone actually tagged on him, being it to attack a closeout, to reach in for an offensive board or to make his 3s, but for an Ingles and Gobert pick and roll, it's an extra man help that teams been able to live with.
Also Paschall, who as Whiteside has been a real good adition on its own, but his lack of spacing make teams able to send other man on the ballhandler. Mitchell and Conley are able to exploit that, and a lot of Eric's offensive contribution comes from not having anyone actually tagged on him, being it to attack a closeout, to reach in for an offensive board or to make his 3s, but for an Ingles and Gobert pick and roll, it's an extra man help that teams been able to live with.
Last edited:
Ineptimusprime
Well-Known Member
Trade Bogey yesterday for a cheaper, younger lower usage “3&D” defensive wing that can shoot at least 35% from 3. Bogey’s a fine player, but not critical at all to what we do.
We’ll be adding another high usage player to his position very soon with Gay. We have far too many high usage offensive players, and we need a wing stopper a hell of a lot more than we need Bogey.
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. If this hasn’t happened by the deadline, I give up. It makes sense for luxury tax reasons too.
We’ll be adding another high usage player to his position very soon with Gay. We have far too many high usage offensive players, and we need a wing stopper a hell of a lot more than we need Bogey.
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. If this hasn’t happened by the deadline, I give up. It makes sense for luxury tax reasons too.
You got a name? Maybe the agent's number?
rjfan
Well-Known Member
I think right now it's much more of a wishful thinking than anything else, considering what assets we do actually have to offer, but i could see some between Grant, Wood and maybe Lance Jr depending on how much Blazers struggle and Lillard says enough.
Fairly feasible that all of this (all these teams decisions to move on from these, if made, which is ever a big if) could only come as offseason time, but outside of losing this season, this actually could open us more flexibility in terms of future firsts we'd be able to offer (also the more time Butler gets to improve and show something to rise his stock as a prospect and player, the better), as no matter how mediocre we could end up being this year if all goes wrong, this is the year the second pick from Conley trade will convey unless our pick ends up as a top 6, which would be hard to do even if only one of Gobert or Mitchell went down for the season, thus freeing us to sell the picks from years that were covered by its protections for 2023 and 2024.
Sure, it should take an all in move to do it, like consider the idea of packing Bogey along 2 future firsts, and not even shying away to include other guy as Butler or Clarkson to make it if ultimately went down to it (tho the second first wouldn't be preferable on those scenarios and Grant would posibly the one i'd be more interested going all the way and Nance the more opportunistic and lesser upside option) but we're past the "bake the cake" time with the age group of all guys not named Mitchell on our roster and his contract timeline
Last edited:
